G8 Summit: Security vs. Individual Rights?

In two weeks, representatives of the seven leading industrial nations plus Russia (G8 states) are going to meet in Heiligendamm, Germany (located on the eastern baltic coast, between Wismar and Rostock). Traditionally, G8 summits were accompanied by - often violent - demonstrations of anti-globalization activists (article, in German). Thus, in order to assure a peaceful course of the summit and the protection of its participants, German law enforcement authorities decided to scotch potential violence by performing certain preventive, yet highly controversial measures. German police raided homes of several anti-globalization activists (see also previous post). Recently, odor samples were taken of several activists in order to train dogs to recognize suspects (article, in German). Critics pointed out that Stasi in the former German Democratic Republic used similar methods.

Does the end justify the means in this case? It is certainly important to provide security to summit participants. Yet, Germany is a democracy based on granting to its citizens certain fundamental rights and freedoms - among them the right of privacy and the freedom of assembly. Generally speaking, in a democracy, state authorities only have the right to limit free exercise of these rights in certain situations, in particular when they are outweighed by a superior interest. When it comes to preventive measures, the State's burden to find alternative, less invasive measures is especially high. According to some human rights specialists, German law enforcement authorities seem to hollow out this legal framework under the guise of warranting domestic security (article, in English). This seems to be a general phenomenon in Western democracies, triggered by 9/11 ... Although this development is comprehensible, it is dangerous as it shifts the balance away from protection of individual rights towards national security and prevention. The basic question is where to draw the line between national security and individual rights. To answer this question one should step back a little and reflect on the principles upon which Western democracies developed and on the extent to which those principles could be curtailed without rendering our democracies baseless.